PETITIONER:
PAPANNA & ANR. ETC.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT01/11/1995
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
KIRPAL B.N. (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCC (1) 291 JT 1995 (8) 107
1995 SCALE (6)220
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6260 OF 1983
O R D E R
After Mr. K.N. Bhat was designated as Senior Advocate,
the Registry had issued notices to all the appellants to
make alternative arrangements as early as in 1987-88 and the
same were served on all the appellants except appellant No.2
who was reported to be dead. None has entered appearance
through counsel nor did they appear in person today. As a
matter of fact, it is the professional duty of the counsel,
on being designated as Senior Advocate, to intimate that
fact to all his clients and request them to make alternative
arrangements to engage another advocate-on\record. It is no
part of the duty of this Court to inform the parties.
However, it has already been done. In view of the fact that
the decree challenging the validity of the notification
under Section 4(1) of he Land Acquisition Act being common
to all the appellants and being indivisible, the appeals
stand abated against all since the legal representatives of
the second appellant have not been brought on record till
date.
The appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs.